Letters to the Editor
-
When Sanjaya is invited, is it even Versailles?
When someone with the political weight of Sanjaya is invited to such a party, is even calling it Versailles too much? It does bring to mind, though, the story of Marie Antoinette dressing herself and her ladies in waiting up like milk maids and going down to the "cottage" to pretend to be real people.
The whole dinner sounded pathetic, and this attraction to celebrities is sad. Maybe is was so bad this year that they will call it off in the future? Oh well, a girl can hope.
-
Compare....
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/23/us/politics/23web-nagourney.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Was that a mistake on our part? Perhaps. Our goal is to give people as much information and insight as we can, in this case to help them understand what was happening in a campaign and to give them a heads-up about what to watch for.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/international/middleeast/26FTE_NOTE.html?ex=1177473600&en=68695f00ef3c8e14&ei=5070
But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged — or failed to emerge.
It would appear that severe damage followed by belated apologies is just SOP at the NYT.
I suppose I should be thankful for small favors!
-
Versailles.
I've been trying, without luck, to find this newspaper article I read a couple of weeks ago -- I think I followed a link to it from Media Matters -- in which various D.C. reporters considered the charge that their social relationships with the politicians they covered were undermining their supposedly "adversarial" professional relationship with those same politicians. One of the reporters had a priceless comment . . . something like: "Well, I'd be worried about these parties if there were any evidence that it was actually causing political correspondents to be less aggressive in their reporting. However, I don't think anybody would say that the White House Press Corps has gone easy on Bush." (D'oh!)
Did anyone else see this? If you know what I'm talking about, perhaps you can put up a link.
Unrelated Q, to Glenn and others: do you now find yourself (ironically) dreading the countdown to the end of Bush's term? After six years of glaring at the clock, willing the minute hand to move faster, my big fear now is that Bush & Co. will slink out of office without being held accountable, in any meaningful way, for the assorted felonies they've cheerfully and publicly admitted to. If the Democrats take much longer to get the ball rolling with their various investigations, then any talk of indictments and perhaps impeachment will be close enough to the 2008 election that the MSM will unanimously declare that Congress is just trying to score cheap political points. And after Bush is gone, the consensus will be that the country needs to "move on," and that it's therefore a terrible idea for Congress, or the Justice Department (assuming we still have one), or the President (Democratic or Republican) to waste time and energy looking into the various felonies the Bush cabal may have committed while in power.
Finally, as always: great post, Glenn.
-
Laurie David is Enemy of the Week
I think I mentioned this if the below thread. But Great American SEan Hannity named her Enemy of the Week last night. She's now joined the ranks of Kim Jong Il, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Aminjahad.
-
I've heard this story before....
From a sermon I heard years ago:
Man spreads rumour, which damages reputation of someone. He feels remorse, so goes to his pastor, confesses the deed, and asks how he can make up for what he did. Pastor takes man to top of bell tower with a pillow, then cuts open the pillow and releases the feathers into the wind, saying "when you have put all of those feathers back into this pillow, you will have repaired the damage you have done."
For various reporters and politicians, however, it seems the solution is to buy another pillow. "See, good as new!"
-
Wow... this post just reminded me
Of when Signe Wilkinson had a great political cartoon series titled "Shrub." (I think it was discontinued some time ago, but may still be available on line in some way.) All of the major figures of the time were there as some form of flora or fauna.
Paul Rosenberg's "Versailles" could/would be an equally entertaining series of cartoons. Just picture the easily recognizable faces of BigMedia's stars, struggling to hold up the their powdered wigs, necks craning, yet barely able to breathe while wearing their "Louis" costumes (meaning, not enough oxygen to their brains).
It would be either a huge success or else have a devoted cult following. Or maybe something in between. I would pay a subscription fee for that one.
-
some dropped text?
Glenn,
Looks like you might have dropped some text just after "Other than the fact that Coulter used a prohibited word ...".
-
Let them eat cake ..
Which is exactly what the MSM thinks of the "little people". Most don't care that they aren't doing their job. They enjoy the high life too much. Why do you think people like Seymour Hersh refuse to go to these stupid parties? You can't be friends with people you report on.
-
Versailles
One of the historic reasons for Versailles is that the French kings, deciding that they had had enough of independent nobles off in the hinterland of France defying their authority, created the court to centralize their power. Nobility were required to attend, the gossip and social scheming replaced much political plotting, and the cost of maintaining oneself at Versailles according to the standards of the rest of the nobility was ruinous (but could be offset by increasing the burdens on the peasants).
By the way, has anyone seen the cost of housing, or living, in DC, NYC, and LA lately?
-
No. I will not comment.
"it all turned on and toward affection now, ... A affection, Don't you see?"
Persona's, attempting to find a "text" in this G.G.'s late-day's post, deserve to be persecuted; persons attempting to find a "subtext" in it will be banished from sanity? Persons attempting to explain, interpret, explicate, overly analyze, deconstruct, interpret, explicate, analyze, or think they fully "understand" it....Will be exiled to a desert island. Alone in a M. E. 's hot desert. You will be living in the company of other, hellish, 'neocon' exploiters.
"Magnanimous Despair alone,
Could show me so divine a thing..." a thanks to w.b.